Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Two NFC Payment Systems

So retailers have exactly two choices for payment if they want my business. They should accept Apple Pay and Google Wallet, period. Those retailers that do will get my business, those that don't nice knowing you. Here is what I am not going to do. I am not downloading and installing 20 Payment apps on my phone, so take the standards apps or don't.
 
Last edited:
If a store intentionally blocks Apple Pay, I will explain to the cashier that I will simply stop shopping there, and follow up with a complaint to corporate.

It may make sense to mobilze customer backlash by shaming these companies. Perhaps a website with instructions on where to find a competitor that does take Apple Pay near a store that does not.

Oh, my. I wish I could be there when you make your stand. I'm sure I'll be standing by soccer moms and grandparents with their apple phones wondering what the hell you are going on about.
 
Actually - some people need to go back to 2012 and realize that at that time, CurrenC wasn't necc clunky nor did it have strong competition with something better and more secure. NOW, of course, there's something to compare it to.

But so far - the biggest winner in this debate in the past 24 hours has clearly been MR based on the # of posts, clicks and ads served :)
 
I agree with you and here's why:

You go to two stores, say, Home Depot and KMart, and you get one of those letters in the mail.

If you paid by credit card, and someone runs up the tab, how much fun is your life going to be? - not much, but it's a call to the CC company, and "clear those charges off my account, please," and if they don't there are protections, plus it you don't live on your credit cards, it's an inconvenience, not hell=putting.

If you paid by a system attached to your bank account, and it gets cleaned out, how much fun is your life going to be? You, essentially have to beg for your money back.

I have the feeling it will be a big fail and then they wasted stockholder money on installing a system none of their customers have.
 
Apple Pay has no traction.
Target, Rite Aide, Walgreens, CVS, Sears, Walmart, Best Buy, Kmart, 7 Eleven and others have swiftly reacted to the Apple Pay situation, it's problems, complications, and walked away. The last thing these retailers need is to be unwittingly drug into a payment system abyss.

By taking time to review what went wrong and how it might me fixed, will be a very good lesson for Apple.

What abyss? On the merchant side, absolutely nothing has changed if they were already processing NFC through Visa, MC, Amex. That's why the transactions were going through. On their end, it's the same system they already implemented.

They're afraid now because Apple fixed the phone side of the experience and now it's something that people actually would want to use. They'd rather disable an entire method of payment than let people realize that Apple Pay is easy and double QR code scanning with a service that has unfettered access to your checking account is hard.
 
Apple Pay may appeal to iPhone lovers, but it's ultra high cost and timing may be it's downfall. Check out this article:

"Chip and PIN Cards. Every credit card in the U.S. will be replaced by October 2015 with new cards that contain the chip-and-PIN technology that the rest of the world has had for years, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Both Visa and MasterCard are committed to the switch, which will render extinct the plastic in your wallets and purses right now."



http://www.businessinsider.com/chip-and-pin-credit-card-changeover-in-2015-2014-2

There's no costs for Apple Pay. Retailers are not switching to chip readers because of Apple Pay. They're doing it because the banks will be shifting the costs of fraudulent purchases to retailers unless they employ chip readers for their purchases. Apple Pay is just piggybacking on this policy change.

CurrentC on the other hand will require retailers to purchase QR readers solely for CurrentC.
 
As I said, if Apple wasn't involved, I doubt there would be an uproar about it.

I think you're right. I wouldn't have cared either way about the MCX process before. We don't have a Walmart or Target in my city, and I can count the number of times I've been in both stores on 1 hand.

Now, however, I've seen how much more secure my CC use can be, and how easy and convenient the ApplePay process is so I do want to be able to use it as much as I can, anywhere I can.

Plus, reading more about it, and how intrusive and consumer-unfriendly it appears to be bugs me, but that's just me:eek:
 
Really now
 

Attachments

  • e31.jpg
    e31.jpg
    44.1 KB · Views: 75
The worst thing for MCX/CurrentC, is that people that are the most likely to embrace a new electronic form of payments are probably the same people that will embrace Apple pay or Google Wallet first, being knowledgable that they are easier and more secure than CurrentC. And these people are "tastemakers", meaning that other people will follow them into using Apple Pay and GW. That's why even though the people complaining here are a small percentage of the US population, they will likely have an negative impact on the success of CurrentC.

Former Walmart CEO Lee Scott is reported to have said, "I don't know that MCX will succeed, and I don't care. As long as Visa suffers." which to me sounds like CurrentC is really just a negotiation tactic to get CC companies to lower their fees. Never mind the billions that will be wasted installing this new system, only to have it removed when it becomes clear that it will fail.

NFC and EMV tokenization is looking to become the new international "standard" form of payment, proof is that Apple Pay already works in other countries (only with US Cards though, because the deals only have been made with US companies for now).

I find it weird that some people here, which usually like to bash Apple for having their own proprietary solutions instead of embracing standards, and like to champion "consumer choice", are siding with MCX on this issue when the latter is in this case the one to be forcing its proprietary solution and disabling the more "standard" one.

I hate to say that, but if we reversed the roles between Apple Pay and CurrentC, these people would probably still side with MCX and bash Apple for shutting down a more standard and secure solution.
 
Oh, my. I wish I could be there when you make your stand. I'm sure I'll be standing by soccer moms and grandparents with their apple phones wondering what the hell you are going on about.

Imagine trying to explain how a debit card works to someone 30 years ago.

Give it a year. Average person hasn't ever seen an Apple Pay transaction, or even NFC for that matter. Once you've seen a few friends do it, or a few random people at a store do it, it will look like magic. And it will be something that people want.
 
It's even worse than that. Another poster pointed this out:

http://support.currentc.com/#Account-Maintenance

Enter your personal information – Note: Driver’s license number and social security number are used to confirm your identity. This information is not stored in your phone.

So where is this sensitive info stored then? I am leery of giving out my credit card number. Much less my SS number AND bank info.

No thanks.
 
If a store intentionally blocks Apple Pay, I will explain to the cashier that I will simply stop shopping there, and follow up with a complaint to corporate.

It may make sense to mobilze customer backlash by shaming these companies. Perhaps a website with instructions on where to find a competitor that does take Apple Pay near a store that does not.

You throwing your toys out the pram at a cashier will achieve nothing except you looking like an idiot. By not going there in the first place, you lower profit margins. Only then will a company react.

Companies will HAVE to adopt NFC payments soon. Then you can moan all you like. It's a transition phase thats fairly complex for companies that use to rely on magstrip and the data they get. They will adapt just like the rest of the world already has. The early birds more so. The ones that hesitate and try to bring in thier own form of wallet or app will falter and fall.

Be patient.
 
I would NOT be surprised that a number of retailers get questioned by the FTC and the Justice Department Antitrust Division on why they deliberately are trying to shut out NFC payment systems in favor of CurrentC--a violation of the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts for deliberately locking out competitors.

Yeah, none of these retailers, either individually or as a collective, could be considered having undue influence on their industries or could be considered to be acting as a monopoly. Especially on a product/service that has not launched yet. You'd be hard pressed to even have the case heard.

How do you think Apple gets away with not allowing certain apps on the App Store that may compete with their own offerings?
 
Mods,

We need a sticky on the facts of Apple Pay and MCX. This would [hopefully] stop more people from swooping in with the same misinformation from comments 100 through 2000. It's getting ridiculous.

Read the thread before posting, if you don't want to be bothered and just want to stir the pot, well, that's on you.
 
I think most educated and reasonable people would be irked by MCX and CurrentC anti-consumer philosophy.

True, and I did word it poorly. I didn't mean it to sound like I was trying to be exclusive, but more responding to the idea that this was simple a knee-jerk Apple fangirl comment.
 
What problems? I can see the FTC sniffing around about monopolies, but Apple doesn't need to advertise that they're doing it due to CurrentC. It's a privacy issue actually. All stores participating is CurrentC will be sharing privacy data - medical information and buying habits as well as where products were bought. For that alone, Apple can pull them. Remember, Apple has removed Apps for far less. Apple should let them be aware that without their cooperation, CurrentC is DOA.
It goes against their own policies. It would open up all sorts of commentary and craziness about the App Store. Probably even get people going about kill switches, monopolies, and all that, again.
 
I have a chip card in my wallet. It's nfc only. No contacts. Us chip cards are "contactless". This was just issued. There will be no cards with electrical contacts. It will all be NFC.



Yes, I was also assigned a PIN, and that starts next November.



But my point remains - the cvs terminals do not read the chip now. only mag stripe. They have no contacts to read the chip.


I received my first chipped card yesterday (in the US) and it has the contacts showing on the front of the card.
 
In their cloud.

No thanks.

Oh, it gets better too. From their FAQ:

Removing a Payment Account

There are times when you may want to remove a payment account from CurrentC. If you need to delete your Checking Account from CurrentC, you must contact Customer Care at 1-855-772-8773, otherwise, if you need to remove any other type of payment account here’s how:

Open the CurrentC application
Enter your 4-digit Passcode
From the Home Screen select the Accounts button
Press the My Payment tab
Select the payment account what you would like to remove

Reminder: In order to delete your Checking Account from CurrentC, you must contact Customer Care at 1-855-772-8773.

Press the Edit button
Press the Delete Payment Account button
Press the Delete button

Important: If you delete a payment account, you will no longer be able to access the payment account’s transaction history in the wallet. If you need the deleted payment account’s transaction history, you must contact Customer Care at 1-855-772-8773. There is one exception: the Checking Account is the only payment account that will still hold transaction history in the wallet after removal from CurrentC.

They hold onto your checking account information with all their might. You can't even remove your checking account except by CALLING THEM, and even when you do - they retain all the transaction info anyway (good luck on ever getting them to not retain your SSN and DL# by the way!).

Also note the entirely conspicuous lack of anything resembling a privacy policy. I even googled for it and found nothing. This techcrunch presentation doesn't inspire confidence either - there's apparently an option for them to spy on your browser history (!) - which they helpfully let you disable. Craziness.
 
You like being uninformed? :rolleyes:



http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html


Microsoft to invest $150 million in Apple

By Dawn Kawamoto , Ben Heskett and Mike Ricciuti
Staff Writers, CNET News

Related Stories.
Ellison says he'll join Apple board
August 1, 1997
Jobs rejects Apple chairman post
July 31, 1997
Amelio, Hancock out of Apple
July 9, 1997

BOSTON--Microsoft (MSFT) is lending Apple Computer (AAPL) an unexpected and somewhat controversial helping hand.
Microsoft chairman Bill Gates said today As the Macworld turns that the software giant will invest $150 million in Apple and will develop and ship future versions of its Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer, and development tools for the Macintosh.

Gates, who appeared via satellite link, and Apple director Steve Jobs made the announcement here today at the Macworld Expo trade show.

Both Apple and Microsoft executives denied that the Microsoft investment represents a path to converging the companies' operating systems. However, they said they had agreed to work out a settlement to a long-standing dispute over whether Microsoft's Windows operating system infringes on any of Apple's patents.

More important, Microsoft said it has pledged to offer the Office business productivity software suite for the Macintosh platform for the next five years. Mac Office 98 is expected to debut by the end of the year.

"This deal strengthens Apple's viability. It's a new era in terms of Apple and Microsoft working together," said Apple chief financial officer Fred Anderson, who has been assigned to run the company's daily operations until a successor to outgoing CEO Gilbert Amelio is found.



Fred Anderson, Apple CFO, on Apple-Microsoft collaboration


Observers say the deal, while a shot in the arm for Apple, also may help Microsoft by keeping antitrust charges at bay. Apple represents one of the only alternatives to Microsoft's Windows and the Microsoft-Intel hegemony.

Microsoft chief financial officer Greg Maffei discounted such talk. "Frankly, we weren't driven as much by those kind of considerations as looking at it as a platform for our applications," he said.

Dwight Davis, editor of the Windows Watcher newsletter, said the real benefit for Microsoft is that it gains an ally against Sun Microsystems' Java programming language. "Apple has not been the bogeyman to Microsoft in a long time. They are more than happy to have a legitimate threat to their business, and it's called Java."

For Apple's part, Anderson said, "Microsoft Office is very important to our Mac customer base, and this deal provides for continued availability of the outstanding Microsoft Office product on the Mac platform."

More than 8 million customers use Microsoft Office for the Macintosh, making it "the single largest revenue Mac application," Maffei said. "It's a very important application for Apple and its customers, and it's a very important application for Microsoft and its customers. It's a several-hundred-million-dollar item."

Analysts said that Microsoft's assurance of providing its latest applications on the Macintosh may be more important to the company's long-term viability than the $150 million investment.

"The decision to produce Office on the Mac will be a big boost for Apple. It has been a year-to-year waiting game in the past as to whether Microsoft would support the Mac with new versions," Davis said.

"Gates even suggested that Microsoft might produce the next version of Office first for the Mac. That's a notable commitment from Microsoft. If they withdrew Office support, that would have been the straw to break Apple's back."

Davis also said that given the size of Microsoft, a $150 million commitment amounts to little more than good public relations. "Remember, they spent $450 million on WebTV. The investment still doesn't give Apple a coherent strategy for turning things around."

The companies also agreed to collaborate on the Java programming language and other programming languages to ensure they run consistently on both Windows and Macintosh platforms. In addition, Apple agreed to make Microsoft's Internet Explorer the default browser for the Macintosh platform.

The news, coupled with Steve Jobs's announcements of new Apple board members, pushed the company's stock up more than 40 percent in morning trading. Apple gained more than 8 points in early trading over its closing price yesterday of 19-3/4. (See related story)

"It's very exciting to renew our commitment to Apple," Gates told attendees via satellite.

Jobs, who took the stage to a standing ovation, said that the Microsoft


Anderson on how Jobs put the MS deal in motion
investment cannot be sold for three years and covers non-voting shares in the company. "We have to let go of a few things here. We have to let go of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose," Jobs told the crowd soon after it reacted negatively to Gates's satellite appearance.

Davis said the investment means that Apple will now toe Microsoft's line on Java. "If Java is a threat to Windows, and all operating systems, then it's a threat to Apple and the Mac OS."

The agreement includes no commitments for Apple to use Windows NT, Microsoft's corporate operating system, although previous discussions on the topic have been held, Anderson said.

"NT was not part of this agreement and there are no current plans on this, but this doesn't forego something in the future," Anderson said. He noted there have been no discussions with Microsoft to license Windows CE, the operating system designed for handheld devices, settop boxes, and other non-PC products.

Anderson said that while Internet Explorer will become the default browser on the Mac OS, Apple has a browser distribution agreement with both Netscape (NSCP) and Microsoft.

"Although the default browser will be Internet Explorer, it doesn't preclude the use of [Netscape's browser]...The Netscape deal will continue," Anderson said.

Apple, which ended its third quarter with $1.2 billion in cash, will use the additional $150 million to invest in its core markets of education and creative content, Anderson said. He added that the company expects to gain a higher percentage of its revenues from software and services in these core markets in the future.

Microsoft paid a share price slightly below the market but an average of the recent trading, Maffei said. He confirmed that the software giant has agreed to hold onto its shares for at least three years.

Apple expects to close the investment deal in the next few days
 
I would NOT be surprised that a number of retailers get questioned by the FTC and the Justice Department Antitrust Division on why they deliberately are trying to shut out NFC payment systems in favor of CurrentC--a violation of the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts for deliberately locking out competitors.

I think that government/legislator will also be pushed on the privacy/security concerns of MCX/CurrentC. They are essentially removing a MORE secure payment option and trying to steer consumers toward a a system that requires more personal information, doesn't have the same consumer protections and may have questionable privacy policies.

You can already see the ads running and lobbyists being hit up now....
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.